-

many have not. Some who do not bear it are entitled to it; and all ought to be ambitious of deserving it. I would thus define, or describe, an evangelical minister, as distinguished from one who is not evangelical. Man is a ruined sinner; and God hath provided and revealed salvation in Christ for all who truly believe in him. He then who distinctly, prominently, intelligibly, and scripturally, answers, in his sermons or publications, the all important question, "What must I do to be "saved?" saved from wrath and sin; "saved "with eternal glory:" he, I say, is an evangelical minister. But the preacher who either neglects or declines to answer the question; or who answers it unscripturally, or in an obscure and hesitating manner; is not an evangelical minister.-Now who will venture to come forward to deny and combat this position? I would be understood as meaning by salvation, not only deliverance from wrath, and justification before God; but recovery also unto holiness, and salvation from the world, the flesh, and the devil. Antinomians, who insist not at all on the sanctification of the "Spirit unto "obedience," do not preach the gospel: they only answer, and very far from correctly, one half of the question: and mystics, who dwell on the work of the Spirit, but do not lead men to "the sprink"ling of the blood of Jesus Christ," do not preach the gospel: they only answer, and not correctly, the other half of the question. Yet men, who verge to one or other of these extremes, may still declare so much of the "counsel of God," as to be entitled in some measure to the name. But they who preach mere ethics, or natural religion a little

modified; from which no awakened inquirer can learn the way of salvation by Jesus Christ, however attentively and perseveringly he may listen; are no more evang elical preachers, than Cicero and Seneca were; and few such preachers are at all equal to those heathen moralists on their own ground.

Would it not then be far better for us all, both those who are thus distinguished, and those who take umbrage at the distinction thus invidiously made, to give all diligence, especially by searching the scriptures, and by prayer to the Father of lights, "the Giver of every good and perfect gift ;" that they may become, more and more, what the words EVANGELICAL PREACHER imply; and so in the sight of God to have a right to it;-than to dispute about an empty title, which like all other titles, must disgrace him who bears it, and does not deserve it? In this the word EVANGELICAL widely differs from CALVINIST. We all ought to be evangelical; but we none of us ought to be Calvinists, in the strict meaning of the word; that is, the disciples of Calvin, as if Calvin " had been cruci"fied for us, or we had been baptized in his name."'

The term itself indeed, if assumed, would not have been more objectionable, or arrogant, than that of ORTHODOX, which numbers of our opponents assume, without hesitation, to themselves and those of their own sentiments. Whether they have a right to it or not, the great decisive day must determine: but orthodox signifies holding right opinions; what is orthodox must be right;

1 Cor. i. 12, 13.

.

and a man's creed may be in part wrong by material omissions, as well as by false doctrines. The terms Calvinist and evangelical by no means designate the same body of men; as all must know, who have turned their inquiries particularly to facts, and the state of things as now actually existing: but, as our opponents consider both as opprobrious they will probably continue to unite them. Should, however, the title of evangelical fall into disuse, as perhaps it may; either the favourers or the opposers of the tenets and style of preaching, by which the evangelical ministers are distinguished, will devise some new name, honourable or opprobrious, without consulting the persons who must be designated by it, whether they will or not.-" The sect of the Nazarenes" was the ancient opprobrious title. "The disciples "were called Christians" probably by divine monition: yet that name was considered by others as a reproachful term. For ages past, it has been given so indiscriminately that it is scarcely considered either as an honour or a reproach. : They, therefore, who have been more earnest in religion than their neighbours, have received other titles, of either honourable or dishonourable distinction. Besides the names derived from those individuals whose followers they themselves professed to be, they have been styled Pietists, Puritans, Quakers, Methodists, &c. In fact, whether the earnestness of the companies thus denominated be sterling zeal for pure Christianity, or a false unhallowed fire; some discriminating name must be used concerning them and a wise man will little regard this, to whomsoever it is given; for he will not judge of

characters or doctrines by report, by clamour, or by names, but by fairly comparing them with the holy scripture; thus "proving all things, and holding fast that which is good."

The connexion in which the words' listless in'dolence' are introduced by his Lordship' implies that the Calvinists, and among them at least the evangelical clergy, are intended; and a few remarks on this subject, in respect of the latter, may not be here improper.

It may indeed very properly be inquired by our ecclesiastical superiors and rulers, whether the evangelical clergy are usefully employed or not; but certainly, as a body, they shew few symptoms of listless indolence.' Whatever be their motive or object, they are generally more active than others in religious exertions. They preach more frequently and earnestly, and longer sermons, than other clergymen generally do: and, with not many exceptions they deliver their own compositions, even when they do not preach extempore. Their congregatious are generally numerous: their adherents spend more time in the exercises of religion, than it is customary for others to do; and they commonly occupy more of their minister's time, by privately seeking counsel and direction. The ministers themselves are "instant in season "and out of season:" they often preach Sunday evening lectures, and week-day lectures, not uncommonly without any pecuniary remuneration. They introduce the custom of double duty on the

Lord's day, where single was before deemed sufficient; which excites complaints in some quarters: and their superiors find it needful to restrain or frown on their superabundant exertions, far more frequently than to reprove their neglect of such as are prescribed to them. Their private labours

also, in many cases, are supposed to exceed due bounds. Thus they give great umbrage, and, as one said to Bishop Burnet, they set 'an ill-natured

example,' introducing new customs, and shaming those who will not so much as "open a door for "nought."

In a word, zeal, activity, and persevering diligence must be predicated of them, as a body, even by their adversaries; who, considering their exertions either as not wisely, or not honestly, directed, seem to dread many and great dangers, not only to the church, but to the state also, as the consequences of them. Their plans and endeavours at home and from home, nay even their social intercourse with each other, while they excite the most groundless and indeed unreasonable alarms, proclaim that they are not supinely indolent: and, as it might have been previously foreseen, they communicate the same active spirit to their followers.

That this zeal and diligence are employed in promoting what the company in general, and individuals in particular, consider as the cause of benevolence, or "good-will to man," as well as that of Christianity, according to their views of it; the appeal may be safely made to the public at large. Where is that pious and charitable institution; where that proposal made for raising money